Nago Mukhiya Vs The State of Bihar — Bail and Remand | Patna HC (2025)

Nago Mukhiya Vs The State of Bihar — Bail and Remand | Patna HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Release on bail: bail bond of Rs.10,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned A.D.J.-VIII, Khagaria in connection with Alauli P.S. Case No.130 of 1997, subject to the conditions of Section 437(3) CrPC / Section 480(3) BNSS and further conditions of trial cooperation, physical presence on every date (exemption only on documented medical ground), and no deliberate delay of trial.

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioner, who had earlier been on bail, misused it from 10.05.2010 and was declared absconder, should now be released on bail afresh, given that no prosecution witness was examined during about one year and five months of his custody owing to non-availability of the case diary and vacancy of the trial court.

Court's answer

On consideration of the factual submissions, and because not a single prosecution witness was examined despite the petitioner's custody of one year and five months, the petitioner is directed to be released on bail furnishing a bail bond of Rs.10,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned A.D.J.-VIII, Khagaria in connection with Alauli P.S. Case No.130 of 1997.

Ratio / Principle

The release is subject to the conditions laid down under Section 437(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure ('CrPC') and under Section 480(3) of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita ('BNSS'), together with further conditions imposed by the Court.

Key takeaways

Condition (i): the petitioner shall cooperate in the trial and remain physically present before the Trial Court on each and every date until conclusion of the trial; exemption from physical appearance may be allowed by the Trial Court only on the petitioner's medical ground supported by documents.ratio¶24
Condition (ii): the petitioner shall not make any deliberate attempt to delay the trial; failing which the State/informant shall be at liberty to press a petition before the learned trial court itself for cancellation of the petitioner's bail bonds, to be decided in accordance with law by giving him an opportunity of hearing.ratio¶25

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Patna High Court, Criminal Miscellaneous No.25193 of 2025 (arising out of Alauli P.S. Case No.130 of 1997, District Khagaria), decided 14-08-2025 by Chandra Shekhar Jha, J. The petitioner, Nago Mukhiya, had been on bail and misused it from 10.05.2010 when evidence recording was fixed; despite efforts by the trial court he failed to appear and was declared absconder. He had been in custody since 12.04.2024, this being his first misuse of the privilege of bail. Counsel submitted the non-appearance was neither intentional nor deliberate — the petitioner was outside the State for livelihood and was not informed of hearing dates by his conducting lawyer — and that not a single prosecution witness had been examined during his custody of about one year and five months because the case diary was unavailable and the trial court vacant (affirmed through Letter No. 69 dated 07.05.2025 of the I/c Additional District and Sessions Judge-VIII, Khagaria). Considering these facts, the Court directed the petitioner's release on bail upon a bail bond of Rs.10,000/- with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned A.D.J.-VIII, Khagaria, subject to the conditions of Section 437(3) CrPC / Section 480(3) BNSS and further conditions: (i) physical presence before the Trial Court on every date until conclusion of trial, exemption only on medical grounds supported by documents, and (ii) no deliberate attempt to delay the trial, failing which the State/informant may press for cancellation of bail bonds before the trial court, to be decided in accordance with law after affording an opportunity of hearing.